USATF needs to develop a "D" or "C" Level circuit

It's called high school.

Kinney and now Footlocker has had the world's only high school cross country national championships since my grandparents days back when people had to use Microsoft computers instead of iPhones.

It's actually called the USATF national club track & field championship & national club cross country championship. Associations in theory are supposed to hold association championship meets.

but they don't, and all that is garbage.

adsfasd wrote:

but they don't, and all that is garbage.

That's where my idea comes in. Very few runners have participated in a USATF organized meets. We go from NFHS to NCAA and then nothing but the occasional road race. If they are the leaders of our sport they need to do a better job of developing a broader range of talent. USA Triathlon and Cycling, even golf do a better job of facilitating to their "members" Every golf course has a rating and they run a handicap system. If you want to participate in these meets you would need to be a member of USATF, right there would lead to a decent increase in membership fees, money that can be put towards helping a few more athletes a year reach there potential

It could also be a matter of local clubs putting on meets and getting the word out.

It could be a distance only thing- like the American Milers Series. Give opportunities for those runners to get some quality races. Have a rabbit and they may have a breakthrough.

Tiger_runner wrote:

The developmental aspects of the sport are extremely limited after you are 22-23. What would help the sport would be a select set of regional meets in XC/Track that have minimal to no rewards financially, but an opportunity for the maybe 100 runners every year who are at 13:xx-15:xx talent level and could make 1-5 runners become mid 13's or lower because they are given a platform to do so.

How would it help the sport to have more of these athletes?

If you have not done it by college, don't waste your time. Life is short....and running 13:30 when you are 31, as the pinnacle of your career, is a waste of a decade.

How would it help the sport to have more of these athletes?

If you have not done it by college, don't waste your time. Life is short....and running 13:30 when you are 31, as the pinnacle of your career, is a waste of a decade.[/quote]

Your concept is wrong, we aren't supposed to help the sport. We aren't a NFL or NBA, 1000's don't come watch us. The sport is supposed to help US, the little people, the goal of any athlete is to improve every year somehow until they think they can't anymore. We would have a lot less whining or wondering on here about what they could have done if this platform was provided. I agree that slow heats in meets like OXY and Payton Jordan provide some sort of platform. Most people could find any range of competition at a college open xc meet.. I just think the USATF has a opportunity provide a link from the Rupp's of the world to the weekend warriors. A grassroots approach would help the sport and the people in it.

so many things wrong with this post IMO. do you really think everyone goes through college injury/distraction-free and reaches there FULL potential by the end of their senior year? hell no! i'd say that applies to a very small percentage of serious runners. and it's not about the handful of guys that you encourage to improve over the years and get down to 13:30. it's about the 1-2 guys in that group that stick with it, put in the work for 6-10 years after college, have a breakthrough, and become elite. finally, a very large number of young US athletes with distance running talent choose to play other sports...and you're asking "how would it help the sport to have more athletes?". congrats if you're a troll cuz you got me worked up. if not, you are just really not thinking about this.

troofiness wrote:

If you have not done it by college, don't waste your time. Life is short....and running 13:30 when you are 31, as the pinnacle of your career, is a waste of a decade.

Isn't this basically what a lot of USATF associations already do? Personally the membership fee garbage keeps me away from these types of things - I'd rather jump in an all-comers meet (which are usually run quite well in my experience) to get on the track, or run any road race with some decent incentive$ to run fast, regardless of being a 'member'.

I do agree that more of a 'minor league' track system for post collegiates would be nice though.

Tiger_runner wrote:

That's where my idea comes in. Very few runners have participated in a USATF organized meets. We go from NFHS to NCAA and then nothing but the occasional road race. If they are the leaders of our sport they need to do a better job of developing a broader range of talent. USA Triathlon and Cycling, even golf do a better job of facilitating to their "members" Every golf course has a rating and they run a handicap system. If you want to participate in these meets you would need to be a member of USATF, right there would lead to a decent increase in membership fees, money that can be put towards helping a few more athletes a year reach there potential

I actually think this is a good idea. In cycling in my state there's an organization that has a yearly meeting to plan out race schedules and determine when and where the state championships will be. Being a state champ is a pretty cool bonus.

Having a state or regional running championship would be pretty awesome as well. Actually, forming almost a league would work, too. Like the Diamond League but way smaller. It works in cycling but everyone is operating under a central governing body so not sure how it'd work in running.

You guys sound like Doug Logan fans. Remember he got spanked by USATF for having similiar ideas.

What is a "D" level runner actually going to develop into?

Probably nothing, but he'll be pushing the C level guys who push the B level guys, who push the A level guys. The rising tide lifts all boats. Check out the number of high school runners who broke 4:10 and 9:00 by the year. I can guarantee that the number of high school runners who broke 4:30 or 9:40 trended similarly. And that, in turn, bolsters the most elite.

Anyways, back to the subject at hand (development races for 13:XX-14:XX runners)--how would it work? There are a few college meets to race in (Gina, Stanford, Last Chances) during the college season, but after NCAAs it's game over--back to the roads. Would this hypothetical top circuit be in mid-june, or would it be after USAs? Would there be prize money? Time bonuses? Rabbits? How'd you fund it?

What you're talking about it s great idea. Cycling has implemented something similar with huge success and competitive races from the country's elite on down to good masters.

No idea where USATF is in this.

that's what little places like eug are for

Track and Field, and XC interest is regional at best in our country.

for instance, go to football hotbeds. most high schoolers are more interested in that or soccer. Track and field takes a back seat to most other sports.

Many areas, like where I am in New England have "all comer" meets all year 'round.

I can go to many of the colleges in the winter and use their indoor track for a fee in an all comers meet.

The same is true for outdoors.

What I'm saying is, the opportunities are there. The interest is not.

mcnees flee's wrote:

You guys sound like Doug Logan fans. Remember he got spanked by USATF for having similiar ideas.

I have absolutely no idea who that is.

But thanks for your mindless, useless, irrelevant drivel anyway.

mcnees flee's wrote:

You guys sound like Doug Logan fans. Remember he got spanked by USATF for having similiar ideas.

metrododger wrote:

I have absolutely no idea who that is.

But thanks for your mindless, useless, irrelevant drivel anyway.

Don't confuse your ignorance with another poster's irrelevance.

You are clearly too poorly informed to know that your statement is like saying Sarkozy is irrelevant to a discussion of French politics.